yakov_a_jerkov (![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png)
yakov_a_jerkov) wrote2019-04-30 07:22 pm
yakov_a_jerkov) wrote2019-04-30 07:22 pm
Мюллер и Барр
Mueller complained that Barr’s letter did not capture ‘context’ of Trump probe:
Но Мюллер... Он решил написать Барру письмо?!
Мюллер после двух лет расследования лучше любого другого знает, что имеет дело с мошенниками. Speak up, еслки-палки! Какой смысл писать частные письма жуликам?
Special counsel Robert S. Mueller III wrote a letter in late March complaining to Attorney General William P. Barr that a four-page memo to Congress describing the principal conclusions of the investigation into President Trump “did not fully capture the context, nature, and substance” of Mueller’s work, according to a copy of the letter reviewed Tuesday by The Washington Post.И без этой информации мы знали, что Барр в своем письме злонамеренно представил доклад Мюллера в совершенно misleading свете. Мы также знаем, что Барр на должности AG исполняет роль лакея Трама.
At the time the letter was sent on March 27, Barr had announced that Mueller had not found a conspiracy between the Trump campaign and Russian officials seeking to interfere in the 2016 presidential election. Barr also said Mueller had not reached a conclusion about whether Trump had tried to obstruct justice, but Barr reviewed the evidence and found it insufficient to support such a charge.
Days after Barr’s announcement, Mueller wrote a previously unknown private letter to the Justice Department, which revealed a degree of dissatisfaction with the public discussion of Mueller’s work that shocked senior Justice Department officials, according to people familiar with the discussions.
“The summary letter the Department sent to Congress and released to the public late in the afternoon of March 24 did not fully capture the context, nature, and substance of this office’s work and conclusions,” Mueller wrote. “There is now public confusion about critical aspects of the results of our investigation. This threatens to undermine a central purpose for which the Department appointed the Special Counsel: to assure full public confidence in the outcome of the investigations.”
The letter made a key request: that Barr release the 448-page report’s introductions and executive summaries, and made some initial suggested redactions for doing so, according to Justice Department officials.
Но Мюллер... Он решил написать Барру письмо?!
Мюллер после двух лет расследования лучше любого другого знает, что имеет дело с мошенниками. Speak up, еслки-палки! Какой смысл писать частные письма жуликам?
no subject
1. Roe v. Wave появился в 1973 несколько преждевременно, когда общество еще не совсем дозрело до права на аборты.
2. Вопрос абортов было сознательно решено использовать для привлечения религиозно-озабоченных на выборы Рейгана в 1980 и объединения под этим соусом верующих разных деноминаций. До этого слово «христианин» (Christian) в США для самоидентификации не употреблялось , потому что требовало указания специфической деноминации.
Политтехнологический трюк сработал.
In the run-up to the convention, as the Christian Science Monitor reported in June 1980, Reagan began talking up his own “born again” faith, eyeing evangelicals who were “disillusioned by what they see as President Carter's failure to actively oppose legalized abortion, homosexual rights, and the Equal Rights Amendment.”
It worked. On Election Day 1980, the evangelical vote did a 180-degree flip. What had gone for Carter by 25 points now went against Carter by 26 points.
https://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2015/07/reagan-god-bless-america-120286
Новая веха идет сейчас. Трамп пакует федеральные суды пожизненно назначенными "религиозными ебаньками", отобранными Heritage Foundation.
https://www.prochoiceamerica.org/laws-policy/trumps-anti-choice-judicial-nominees/
no subject
no subject
Руку приложил основатель Heritage Foundation Пол Вайрих. Хотя, по его словам, евангелистов возбудил тогда не столько вопрос абортов, сколько вопрос десегрегации.
The IRS threat against segregated schools, he said, "enraged the Christian community." That, not abortion, according to Weyrich, was what galvanized politically conservative evangelicals into the Religious Right and goaded them into action. "It was not the other things," he said.
Ed Dobson, Falwell's erstwhile associate, corroborated Weyrich's account during the ensuing discussion. "The Religious New Right did not start because of a concern about abortion," Dobson said. "I sat in the non-smoke-filled back room with the Moral Majority, and I frankly do not remember abortion ever being mentioned as a reason why we ought to do something."
During the following break in the conference proceedings, I cornered Weyrich to make sure I had heard him correctly. He was adamant that, yes, the 1975 action by the IRS against Bob Jones University was responsible for the genesis of the Religious Right in the late 1970s. What about abortion? After mobilizing to defend Bob Jones University and its racially discriminatory policies, Weyrich said, these evangelical leaders held a conference call to discuss strategy. He recalled that someone suggested that they had the makings of a broader political movement—something that Weyrich had been pushing for all along—and asked what other issues they might address. Several callers made suggestions, and then, according to Weyrich, a voice on the end of one of the lines said, "How about abortion?" And that is how abortion was cobbled into the political agenda of the Religious Right.
https://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=5502785?storyId=5502785